Category: queer

Classical Latin and transgender literature

Catus and Nevada

Come back drunk from dinner, which to read, which to read? I’ve read both Imogen Binnie’s Nevada and the Cat in the Hat in Latin so many times! The obvious solution is to brush up my Latin by rereading The Cat in the Hat and then annotate Nevada with extensive Pierre-de-Fermat-esque marginalia: “I could prove you’re not an ‘autogynephiliac,’ James H., but first I have to feed my imaginary cat.” Posso tuum tamquam puella non te places probare, Iacobe H., sed primo habeo felem imaginariam meam alere.

(P.S., my Latin is actually very rusty, so apologies, classicists, if I got stuff wrong.)

Advertisements

It’s a shame that the influence of culture still boo-hooed in the queer community. These are multifaceted complex traits. Just because there are cultural influences constantly condensing and “metabolizing” latent genetic tendencies does not mean that alternative sexual behaviors, fantasies and attractions doesn’t are somehow not legitimate or unimportant. These phenomena are not purely material (id est, genetic and hormonal) and possible cultural influences range from the masculinity and femininity of a given culture, its individualism and the influences of prejudice and conformative forces from communities as different as mainstream consumerist culture and the queer community, which works so hard to differentiate itself from the mainstream.

Constitutional interpretation and entrail reading

This is a day late, BUT…

So think what happened yesterday in the US Supreme Court is absolutely wonderful, yada, yada, et cetera.

But am I the only one who thinks constitutional interpretation is a bit like reading entrails? Or at least an honorable game of “now what do you think the connotation of this word/phrase is? Well, I don’t know, but I’m thinking of a number between one and ten…”

The writers of the Fourteenth Amendment most certainly did not have yesterday’s ruling in mind when they wrote it.

And yes, I know there’s this idea is that the US Constitution is supposed to be flexible and all that, but even so, I guarantee you every one of them would have freakin’ hated this court ruling.

So, I don’t know. Not sure I have a point other than that the constitution seems vague enough that it can justify anything from net neutrality (or not), same sex marriage (or not), NSA spying (or not) depending on the zeitgeist of whatever time we’re in…

Calling it a sacrèd document is most certainly an unconscious noble lie.

%d bloggers like this: